linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] mtd: ubi: add support for protecting critical volumes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <364911897.123906.1727721820227.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 20:43:40 +0200 (CEST)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: chengzhihao1 <chengzhihao1@...wei.com>
Cc: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, 
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, 
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, robh <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>, 
	linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, 
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] mtd: ubi: add support for protecting critical
 volumes

----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "chengzhihao1" <chengzhihao1@...wei.com>
>>> Von: "Daniel Golle" <daniel@...rotopia.org>
>>> Allow the boot firmware to define volumes which are critical for the
>>> system to boot, such as the bootloader itself if stored inside a UBI
>>> volume. Protect critical volumes by preventing the user from removing,
>>> resizing or writing to them, and also prevent the UBI device from
>>> being detached if a critical volume is present.
>> 
>> I agree with the doubts raised in patch 1/2, if userspace is so hostile
>> to delete system partitions, there is little hope.
>> But I'm still open for discussion.
> 
> Yes, I agree that it is meaningful to prevent user from operating
> volumes accidently. How about doing that by some existing methods? Eg.
> selinux(Design sepolicy for ioctl cmd).

Another thought, do we really need to enforce this in kernel space?
Teaching ubi-tools to be super careful with some volumes is also an option.

like a ubirmvol ... --i-know-what-im-doing.

Thanks,
//richard